 |
|
|
Sirs
This unit has served two terms on Council. From my perspective, the two primary political factions are the "Traditionalists" and the "Militarists." The Traditionalists adhere to values such as noninterference, sentient rights, nonviolence, and improving life styles. The Militarists are concerned with threats such as the Borg and Dominion, and perceive that practical, direct, and forceful action is required to defend against these threats.
It is my perception that both the McLeod and Rybalt administrations are heavily slanted towards Militarist policies. Not only the Chairs, but the Starfleet and FIA representatives presenting problems to Council have had clear bias towards the Militarist view.
I have noted a dominance of Earth citizens serving with the Administration, and reaching senior rank within Starfleet. It is simplistic and perhaps prejudicial to claim all Earth people are Militarists. However, few would deny that Earth has significantly greater influence than most planets, and that of late this influence has been used to further Militarist aims.
It is also a reasonable statement that Earth influence has been used to concentrate much ship building and other activity within the Sol system. Too much of the Federation's budget is routed through Earth's economy.
It is my impression that during the McLeod administration, the Traditionalists had a significant working majority on Council proper. This Traditionalist working majority has if anything increased since Rybalt stepped up to the Chair.
However, the administration has control of our agenda, has control of what facts are presented to Council, controls who presents the facts, and how the facts are presented. The FIA's Major Dast and Starfleet's Admiral Jacobs are examples of extreme Militarist partisans who have presented Council with "the facts" upon which we have made our judgments. I would not doubt your honesty or integrity if you should claim Council's recent decisions are biased towards an Earth-Militarist political slant. This does not mean you will not find Council members sympathetic to your position.
My own position balances precepts of both factions. It is the responsibility of the Federation and Starfleet to protect the lives and liberties of Federation citizens. Against the Borg and Dominion, diplomatic means have been exhausted. It is thus necessary to provide materials and training to Starfleet sufficient to defend the Federation. However, this defense must be a defense of Federation principles, not just lives, materials, and planets. It is our duty to preserve Federation culture. To this extent, the encroachment of Militarist philosophy and doctrine within the Administration and Starfleet Admiralty is a grave concern.
I would welcome very much a delegation to explain in depth your reasons for questioning Federation policy. You were clear in your actions. You were not clear what you would do differently. I am assuming your concern is with the Earth-Militarist faction, but I am only guessing. You have not given clear indication of what the Administration and Council have done which is unsatisfactory, or what you intend to do to correct the unspecified faults.
I also question your tactics. You have every right to withdraw from the Federation. After withdrawing, you have every right to form a new alliance. However, if all planets who have been wronged by Earth left the Federation, this would leave Earth in sole control of Starfleet. You might form a second Council, and elect a second Chair, but I suspect one of your complaints is that Starfleet Admiralty is dominated by Earthlings. For the most part, I would expect Starfleet to continue loyalty to the traditional command structure.
Before claiming sovereignty for a new Council and Chair, please consider a debate upon the traditional floor.
I perceive of myself as a Traditionalist. A part of my belief is that peaceful and legal means should be exhausted before illegal or violent methods are adopted. I assume any group leading a Traditionalist awakening would understand this precept. I would like to invite your people to send representation to the San Francisco Council, or suggest a neutral site for a meeting. Let us attempt to resolve any difficulties through diplomatic means, within the framework of the Constitution.
Please do not adapt confrontationist Militarists tactics preemptively. By moving directly to confrontational schism politics without first attempting a diplomatic and Constitutional resolution, you remind me too much of recent Earth administrations. The Federation's moral decay has gone far if even the Traditionalists prefer confrontation.
My objective is to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United Federation of Planets. I have at times felt the MacLeod and Rybalt administration a threat to the Constitution. It is yet to be seen if you offer answers, or the greater threat.